MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083200098 · doi:10.6017/ital.v33i2.5341

The Importance of Identifying and Accommodating E-Resource Usage Data for the Presence of Outliers. The Negative Impacts of Inaccurate E-Journal Usage Data.

2014· article· en· W2083200098 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation Technology and Libraries · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutlierUploadComputer scienceIdentification (biology)Sample (material)Usage dataResource (disambiguation)Data miningStatisticsData scienceInformation retrievalWorld Wide WebMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents the results of a quantitative analysis examining the effects of abnormal and extreme values on e-journal usage statistics. Detailed are the step-by-step procedures designed specifically to identify and remove these values, termed outliers. By greatly deviating from other values in a sample, outliers distort and contaminate that data. Between 2010 and 2011, e-journal usage at the J.N. Desmarais Library spiked as a result of illegal downloading. The identification and removal of outliers had a noticeable effect on e-journal usage levels. They represented over 100,000 erroneous articles downloaded in 2010 and nearly 200,000 erroneous downloading in 2011.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.006
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.133
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it